*The Voice of the Social-Democrat* No. 19–20 and the manifesto of comrades Axelrod, Dan, Martov, and Martynov, published separately under the title "Letter to Comrades," represent such a bomb, intended to blow up the party immediately after the unification plenum, that we are compelled to come forward with an immediate, if brief, if incomplete warning—to address an alert to all social-democrats.

Let us begin with the fact that *The Voice of the Social-Democrat* fires at us, at the editorial board of the Central Organ. It accuses us, through comrade Martov, of directing his article toward the *Discussion Sheet*{90}. "My article does not discuss the decisions of the plenum at all," writes and emphasizes comrade Martov; this is literally repeated in the "Letter to Comrades."

Anyone who wishes to read comrade Martov's article, entitled "On the Right Path," will see that it directly discusses the decisions of the plenum, directly speaks out against the decision on the composition of the Central Organ, and in detail substantiates the theory of equal rights of tendencies, "neutralization" of tendencies. The glaring falsehood that comrade Martov and the entire editorial board of *The Voice* speak—that the disputed article "does not discuss" the plenum's decisions—resembles outright mockery of the party decision.

If anyone is unclear about the distinction between discussing the plenum's decisions and conscientiously implementing the plenum's line within the Central Organ itself, we invite such people, and especially Mensheviks, to think carefully over the instructive article by comrade Plekhanov in the present issue of the Central Organ and over the no less instructive No. 11 of the *Diary of a Social-Democrat* by the same author. Not a single Menshevik who does not wish to mock the party decision and party unification will be able to deny that in the *Diary* comrade Plekhanov discusses the plenum's decisions, while in the article "In Defense of the Underground" he defends the party line. Can one fail to understand this difference unless one is pursuing the malicious goal of sabotaging the plenum's decisions?

But it is not only that comrade Martov and the entire editorial board of *The Voice* speak glaring falsehood, claiming that the article "On the Right Path" does not discuss the plenum's decisions. The article contains something far worse. The article is entirely constructed on the theory of equal rights between the illegal party, i.e., the RSDLP, on the one hand, and those who have broken away from the party and turned to legalism, wishing to call themselves social-democrats, on the other. The article is entirely constructed on the theory of a split between these "two parts" of the working-class vanguard, "two parts of social-democracy," which are supposedly to unite on the same basis of "equal rights and neutralization" on which any split parts of a whole always unite!

The lack of space does not permit us to multiply citations in confirmation of such a characterization of Martov's views. This will be done in a series of other articles, if this becomes necessary at all, for scarcely anyone would venture to deny Martov's "theory of equal rights."

And this new theory is a direct violation of the plenum's resolutions, moreover: it is a direct mockery of them. Clear to all who conscientiously carry out the plenum's decisions is the meaning of these decisions: the split between party Mensheviks and party Bolsheviks, the split of these old factions, is to be eliminated, and not at all the "split" between all legalists in general and our illegal RSDLP. Those legalists who have broken away from the party are by no means regarded as an entity comparable to the party or a part of social-democracy with equal rights to the party. On the contrary, they are called back to the party under a clearly expressed condition—a break with liquidationism (that is, with legalism at any cost) and a transition to the party point of view, a transition to the "party way of life." The letter of the Central Committee on the conference, this official and absolutely binding commentary to the plenum's resolutions for the party, states with the utmost clarity that the question of whether the legalists are party members in fact must be judged by the illegal organizations{31}—that is, it directly rejects the "theory of equal rights"!

This letter of the Central Committee was compiled according to a special resolution of the plenum by a special commission consisting of comrades Gregory, Innocent, and Martov. The letter was approved unanimously by this entire commission. Now comrade Martov—as if under the influence of some evil spirit—changes course, writes an article thoroughly permeated with the directly opposite theory, and still complains, as if mocking the party, when this article is declared to be a discussion piece!

It is self-evident that this theory of equal rights, expressed in all the other articles of *The Voice* even more sharply and crudely than in Martov's, actually leads to subordination of the party to the liquidators, for such a legalist who opposes himself to the illegal party, considering himself equal in rights to it, is nothing other than a liquidator. "Equal rights" between a social-democrat persecuted by the police and still operating illegally, on the one hand, and a legalist assured of his legality and his separation from the party, on the other hand—in fact this is "equal rights" between a worker and a capitalist.

All this is so obvious, the mockery of *The Voice* toward the plenum's decision and its clarification in the Central Committee's letter is so manifest, that Martov's article cannot be called anything other than indicating the "right path"... to the victory of the liquidators over the party.

Party Mensheviks have already seen this danger. Proof of this is No. 11 of the *Diary of a Social-Democrat*, in which the Menshevik Plekhanov, having just read the plenum's resolutions without yet seeing the Central Committee's "Letter," specifically points out that with "inattentive treatment" of the words of the resolution about legalists "ready to establish stable organizational ties with local party centers"—the "liquidators" can make themselves "a convenient loophole" (p. 20).

Is it not obvious that Plekhanov understands his Voice colleagues perfectly? He has pointed out precisely that loophole of the liquidators which *The Voice of the Social-Democrat* No. 19–20 "works out" with all its might, in almost every article, from first to last line. Are we not justified in calling it "The Voice" of the liquidators?

The following passage from the "Letter to Comrades" shows to what lengths the defense of liquidationism reaches among the Voice people:

"...The Central Organ...must win itself confidence both among the viable elements of the old underground organizations..." (the underground party organizations accord full confidence both to the Central Committee and the Central Organ; it is absurd to speak of "winning" it here)... "and among the new open organizations, which are now the main center (mark that!) of social-democratic work." So, legalists who have broken away from the party are the main center. It is not they who should win the confidence of the party, become party members in deed, enter the party, return to the party—but the party in the person of the Central Organ should "win their confidence"—evidently, through the veiled defense of liquidationism, through the preparation of loopholes for liquidationism, which we see in *The Voice*!!

The entire article of comrade F. Dan, "The Struggle for Legality," is thoroughly permeated with a liquidationist spirit reaching the point of outright reformism. In saying that "the struggle for legality" is "one of the basic revolutionary tasks," is a "banner," etc., comrade Dan defends not a social-democratic but a Cadet point of view. "Illegal organization as a necessary instrument in the struggle for legality," proclaims comrade Dan. This is in Cadet fashion. Among the Cadets the party is illegal, but their illegality is precisely only a "necessary instrument in the struggle for legality." Among social-democracy, legal organization appears at the present time as one of the necessary instruments of the illegal party.

"...In its light" (the struggle for legality), "in its name alone is it possible at the present time to conduct such a struggle of the proletariat, which sets itself as its goal...the overthrow of the autocracy..."

This reasoning, in turn, must be turned inside-out to become a social-democratic argument. Only in the light of the struggle for the overthrow of the autocracy, only in its name is it possible to conduct genuinely social-democratic work in legal organizations. Only in the name of the struggle for the untrammeled revolutionary demands of the proletariat, only in the light of the program and tactics of revolutionary Marxism is it possible to actually successfully utilize by social-democracy all and every legal opportunity, possible and necessary is the most stubborn defense of them and their transformation into strongpoints of our party work.

But this is still not all. The Voice people directly strike in the face the plenum's decisions when they come out both in their letter and in their newspaper with agitation for the continuation of *The Voice* contrary to the Central Committee's decisions. We shall not here analyze the ridiculous and pathetic sophistry with which they attempt to justify the sabotage of a party decision. We shall instead limit ourselves—at least in this brief article—to a reference to the voice of party Menshevism, to No. 11 of the *Diary*. Comrade Plekhanov foresaw this loophole of the liquidators too, saying directly, simply, and clearly that which no loyal social-democrat can doubt: "agitation against the closing of *The Voice*," he writes on p. 18, is "agitation against the destruction of a faction, that is, for the reduction to naught of the most important of all possible results of the Central Committee's plenum." What is *The Voice of the Social-Democrat* for Mensheviks of a particular persuasion? It is their de facto factional—moreover, irresponsible—center.

Precisely so. The reduction to naught of unification—that is what the matter comes down to with *The Voice* No. 19–20 and the manifesto of four editors of *The Voice* against the plenum's decisions. After the unification plenum they came out with far more candid, far more unceremonious defense of liquidationism than before the plenum. When their manifesto informs the Mensheviks that the letter of the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee on groups{91}, a letter calling for the creation of genuine unity, was adopted against the votes of Menshevik and Bundist members of the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee, everyone understands that before us lies a poorly disguised call to disobedience to this letter, to the sabotage of foreign unification. Let the party Mensheviks who condemn the Voice people move from condemnation to action if they wish to defend party unification at any cost. The fate of this unification now depends on the party Mensheviks, on their willingness and ability to wage a direct struggle both with the foreign and with the Russian "de facto center" of the Voice people-liquidators.

This Russian center, the Russian Menshevik Center, appears directly in No. 19–20 of *The Voice*, appears with an "open letter" in which Plekhanov is declared a "liquidator of Menshevik ideas." The withdrawal of Mensheviks from the party, this Russian Menshevik Center explains—or rather, it would be more correct to say, justifies—by the "widely known phenomenon of the deadening of party cells"!! Those who are leaving—the manifesto of the Menshevik Center tells us—"are falsely called liquidators" (p. 24 of *The Voice*).

We ask all social-democrats capable of impartiality, we ask in particular working social-democrats, regardless of tendency, does not the appearance of such a manifesto of the Menshevik Center the day after the plenum mean the reduction to naught of the cause of unification?

We consider it our duty to communicate to the entire party the names of those who signed this famous—we are certain it will become herostratic-style famous—document: 1) Avgustovskii, 2) Anton, 3) Vadim, 4) V. Petrova, 5) Georgii, 6) Georg, 7) Evg. Ga—az, 8) Kramolnikov, 9) D. Koltsov, 10) Nat. Mikhailova, 11) Roman, 12) Romul, 13) Solomonov, 14) Cherevinin (well, of course!), 15) Yuri, 16) Ya. P—ii{92}.

"These signatures," writes the editorial board of *The Voice*, "belong to old party workers, well known to the editorial board; some of them held responsible positions in the party."

These names, we answer, will be nailed to the pillory of shame by all conscious social-democratic workers when they read *The Voice of the Social-Democrat* No. 19–20, when they become acquainted with the plenum's decisions, when they learn the following fact:

The Russian Bureau of the Central Committee{93} has these days sent an official letter to the Foreign Bureau of the Central Committee (the foreign executive organ of the Central Committee). In this letter it is literally stated:

"...We approached comrades Mikhail, Roman, and Yuri" (we have underlined these names above) "with a proposal to join the work, but received from them an answer stating that they consider not only the plenum's decisions harmful, but find the very existence of the Central Committee harmful. On this basis they refuse even to appear at a single session for co-optation..."{32} (Let us clarify on our part: the leaders of the Menshevik Center not only refuse themselves to support the Central Committee but also refuse to appear for the co-optation of other Mensheviks, for the co-optation of Menshevik workers, knowing perfectly well that their refusal to appear for co-optation obstructs the work of the Central Committee, obstructs its formation, forces, perhaps for months, a postponement of the Central Committee's very commencement of work as a Central Committee.)

So then, those very people who declare in print, with the assistance and approval of Axelrod, Dan, Martov, and Martynov, that Plekhanov "falsely calls them 'liquidators'"—directly sabotage the very existence of the Central Committee, proclaim its existence harmful.

Those very people who cry out in underground publications (through *The Voice*) and in legal publications (through liberals) about the "widely known phenomenon of the deadening of party cells"—themselves sabotage attempts to establish, restore, and set in motion these cells, and even such a cell as the Central Committee.

Let all social-democrats now know whom the manifesto of comrades Axelrod, Dan, Martov, and Martynov means when it speaks of "activists of the open movement who have now taken the main forward positions of the struggling proletariat." Let all social-democrats now know to whom the editorial board of *The Voice* addresses itself when it writes: "we would like it if comrades" (Mikhails, Romans, Yuris) "would appreciate the significance of the breach which has now been made in official dogma, which truly condemned party organization to inevitable deadening, and tried to occupy the positions opened up to them" (to the Mikhails, Romans, Yuris) "by this very breach."

We appeal to all organizations, to all groups of our party, and we ask them: do they intend to tolerate this mockery of social-democracy? Is it permissible now to remain a passive observer of what is happening, or is it obligatory to come forward with a decisive struggle against the tendency which is undermining the very existence of the party?

We ask all Russian social-democrats: can they still have any doubt now concerning what constitutes the practical, real-political significance of the "theory of equal rights" of tendencies, equal rights of legalists and the illegal party, of the theory of "struggle for legality," etc., etc.?

These theories, these arguments, these loopholes are the verbal shield behind which hide such enemies of social-democracy as Mikhails, Romans, and Yuris, such political accomplices of theirs as the sixteen Menshevik herostrats, such ideological leaders of theirs as the literati conducting "The Voice of the Liquidators."

So then: No. 19–20 of *The Voice of the Social-Democrat* and the schismatic manifesto of the four editors of *The Voice*, "To Comrades," is direct agitation:

for a factional organ against unity, against unification abroad, in defense of obvious liquidationism, in defense of direct opponents of the very existence of the Central Committee, Against the Party!

The conspiracy against the party has been exposed. All to whom the existence of the RSDLP is dear, stand forth in defense of the party!

Written March 11 (24), 1910

Published between March 12–16 (26–29) as a separate offprint from the newspaper *Social-Democrat* No. 12

Printed from the text of the separate offprint, collated with the text of the newspaper